DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
To invoke the drastic remedy of preclusion, the Supreme Court must determine that the offending party's lack of cooperation with disclosure was willful, deliberate, and contumacious (see CPLR 3126; Kelleher v. Mt. Kisco Med. Group, 264 A.D.2d 760; Maillard v. Maillard, 243 A.D.2d 448). In this case, the willful and contumacious character of the defendants' failure to respond to discovery can be inferred from their continuing noncompliance with a court-ordered stipulation to produce relevant records, repeated adjournments of the production date, and inadequate excuses for the failure to produce the records (see Brandes v. Pirnie-Baker, 288 A.D.2d 413, 414; Kelleher v. Mt. Kisco Med. Group, supra at 761; Frias v. Fortini, 240 A.D.2d 467). Accordingly, the Supreme Court's determination to preclude the defendants from offering the relevant evidence at trial was proper.
SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, GOLDSTEIN, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.